In all seriousness, no, I will continue to play my games and think nothing of it. While my heart certainly goes out to the families affected by the shooting, games and gamers were not the cause of it. So I will not be a part of this.

Same.

OT: Can we just drop this shit? It is over and done with. Lets move on and learn from our damned mistakes.

Every time I see this subject, this is what generally happens:

Them: "Oh no, a bunch of kids were killed in America in a shooting!"Me: "...and?"Them: "What do you mean 'and'? Are you heartless? A bunch of kids were jus..."Me: "Yea, I am going to cut you off there. Hundreds of kids are killed everyday in various other countries, yet does anyone give a shit about them? No? Why no? Oh yea, because it didn't happen in the country that YOU reside in."

Since you mentioned Fox News, you must surely be familiar with the false equivalence fallacy.

It is the "fair and balanced" notion that knives and the like are equally as deadly as guns.

As long as people hold that artificial equity true, it's virtually impossible to argue safety.

I wanted to say this for some time:"Fair & Balanced" is an oxymoron. "To be Fair" is to give all sides equal room to maneuver. "To balance something" is to make something that arn't equal to become equal. For Fox News to be "Fair & Balanced" they have to only cover storys that is mostly equal from the outset.

"We are simply making a statement that we as Gamers are not going to sit back and ignore the lives that were lost,"

Then fight for Gun Control maybe. People that guilt trip others to feel better is less moral than the person that just don't give a shit.

Baresark:LoL, it was only a matter of time before someone started yelling gun control. A person wanted to take the lives of these people, and no amount of gun control would have prevented that. He would have used homemade pipebombs, or taken a knife and started killing people. It's a mental health issue more than anything.

No, Why should we not make this about Gun Control? The People over at Fox News aren't talking about "Games & Violence" because They believe one cause the other. They do it becuase they don't want us to talk about Gun Control. I say we hurt them, let it backfire. Make it about Gun Control, make it about the fact that the world would be a better place if that guy had a knife insted. If the US had some bloody Gun Control the nut would not kill as many as he did. This idea that if we can't stop something completely we should not decrease the damage is the idea of someone that will do nothing that matter.

That is ridiculous. The world would only be a better place if he wasn't mentally deranged. I don't know why people insist that if someone gets away with one murder it is so much better than someone getting away with 26 murders. At the risk of sounding too conservative, the difference isn't big enough to ignore the root cause of it. Also, I grew up around guns, I have shot lots of guns and most of my friends are all gun owners. I don't own a gun because I don't like them, but I also don't know a single gun owner that is a murderer. It's just bad policy to let a psychopath determine rules for an entire society. I'm free not to own a gun and I do not feel threatened by people who own guns. It's not about gun control, it's about social and mental health.

The problem is that those are more linked to social issues more than anything. Poor people, drug and sex trade, things like that.

That's been debunked time and again.

To sound cliche, guns don't kill people, people kill people.

But they are made a whole lot easier by guns, which is where that specious statement starts to break down.

Seriously, when is the last time someone used a hammer to directly kill dozens of people? Or, since cars almost inevitably come up, when's the last time someone drove a car into a school or movie theater and used it to kill people? Hell, contrast it to the 22 stabbings at a school in China. Most were not seriously injured, none died.

Besides, why facilitate murderers? The logic of "they're just going to do it anyway" is ridiculous. shouldn't murder be harder? Should we make it easy for someone to kill 27 people?

Do we oppose seatbelts because people are going to die anyway? We even say "seatbelts save lives," even though steabelts don't save people, people save people.

Are we against food safety because some people will invariably get sick?

When a natural disaster happens, do we just shrug and say "what are you going to do?"

It's pretty damn hard to massacre with a hammer. Or a bowling ball. Or even a knife.

I have never seen social issues causing crime and murder debunked. People seem under the impression that if someone has a gun they are going to kill someone. That is simply untrue.

You can't dictate the rules for an entire society because psychopaths exist. Seat belts do save people, just not everyone. And occasionally cause someone to die. My issue is that all the gun control nuts out there say that the world would be better off if guns didn't exist. That is completely true, but they do exist. I'm not saying no gun rules. But he could have had the same "success" in his endeavor if he had a small snub nose pistol. So the type of gun is irrelevant. The ease of killing is not particularly relevant because if someone has the will to do it, then they will do it. No one is against gun safety, but you and I have very different idea of what that actually means. For me it's about education and experience. For the vast majority of people, this is enough. For some people it's about no one being allowed to have them, but criminals will have them, which is the impetus for people who aren't criminals to have them.

Fuck these people, not only will they not shut up about how games are the cause of these stupid shootings. But now they have to make it their business to tell us how and when we should enjoy our hobby? FUCK THAT! I was just going to be lazy and drunk on my birthday (12-21), but now I'm going to have to organize a huge lan party just to erect the largest middle finger possible to these people.

Sorry about that, I didn't mean to post right away, I was going to expand on what I was saying. My hand jumped to the mouse so quick I could barely stop it. It's not a gun control issue. It's a mental health issue. This person wanted to kill and the lack of guns would not have stopped him.

I doubt pretty much everything you're saying. It's hard to kill someone with a knife. It requires effort, and strength. When someone decides "I'm gonna kill everyone in my school", he may very well be stopped short by the notion that he doesn't really have a good enough tool for the job.

A gun is easy. Point; shoot. You don't need more than a sidearm, and a Glock can easily hold 20 or more bullets. One bullet is enough to kill someone. But if you get jumped by 2 or more people, it's pretty hard to take both of them on, even with a melee weapon.

No, it very much is a gun control issue. As long as people will continue to get these urges, it will remain a gun control issue. Guns may be just tools, but they're murder tools.

To illustrate my point: let's take this to the extreme and say someone gives you a button. If you press it, a bomb blows up and you kill 1000 people. Taking the decision to press it is easy, it requires virtually no effort, and if you're a real misanthropist you might even do it. But not even the worst mental health problems will ever enable you to kill 1000 people one at a time.

"We are simply making a statement that we as Gamers are not going to sit back and ignore the lives that were lost,"

Well I as a Gamer most certainly am going to sit back from making a useless, pointless gesture that will help absolutely no one. If I was a victim's relative, I wouldn't want the world to mourn because of me. That would just be selfish.

That is completely untrue. It's very easy to kill someone with a knife, and it doesn't take strength at all. It takes a little knowledge of where to attack, which can be gleaned from very rudimentary depictions of the human body. How is the shooters mental problems an issue for the millions of people in this country that do not use their weapons to commit murder? That is the gun control issue, whether law abiding citizens are allowed to own them. Your idea of restricting gun control will not stop criminals from owning guns and will not stop a psychopath from murdering as many people as they can before either killing themselves or getting stopped by somebody. How is one man's violent and misguided intentions the fault of the 144 Million or so people in America that own guns and do not commit murder with them?

But, to give this post some content, I was reading up on an article linked to by former Escapist residents Extra Credits about games not having a link to gun murders when I popped into a newsagent and there, right on the front of UK toilet paper substitute The Daily Record was the headline "Killers Call of Duty Obsession" (or something like that). Did you know that the shooter at Connecticut played the "controversial" game Call of Duty: Black Ops 2? Well, now you do. You also now know why he did it.

Though upon seeing that I was thinking - really, they're still doing this? They could at least try and shake things up a little and blame Little Big Planet or something.

Panicky:People are free to express their condolences however they wish, but I can't say I'm impressed by this. The decision to "cease" shooter games is completely arbitrary and unwittingly lends credibility to the shoddy, distasteful, and hypocritical reporting on this tragedy.

Baresark:The problem is that those are more linked to social issues more than anything. Poor people, drug and sex trade, things like that. If people start murdering people with hammers more, no one is going to argue for stronger hammer control. No one is going to deny a carpenter a hammer based on an arbitrary "cool down" period. Guns are the easy go to for this situation, but if you are going to sit there and deny that "astronomical annual gun fatalities" is not a social or mental health issue, you are incorrect. To sound cliche, guns don't kill people, people kill people. I'm not saying that gun control laws are perfect, they clearly need a lot of work. But this didn't happen because he had access to firearms, this happened because he was mentally disturbed. It's easy to sit there and blame guns, but if/when you remove them, people are still gonna die as the result of these plaguing social/mental health issues. Any other reasoning simply denies the existence of the source of the problem in favor of the tool often used.

Guns, unlike the hammers in your god-awful analogy, are instruments specifically designed for killing and they are disturbingly efficient at it. Nobody is arguing that homicides would disappear if guns were more strictly controlled. But would you not agree that the Sandy Hook incident would have been far less deadly had the assailant been armed with a hammer rather than a semi-automatic rifle? How did having firearms just lying around not exacerbate things?

Things were exacerbated by the fact that the shooter was psychotic. I'm not saying his wants and desires did not more easily come to fruition because he had a gun. But the vast majority of people who own guns do not commit murder with them. Some hunt, some compete in competitions with them, some own them because they have small penises. But most people who own guns do not run around shooting people. The analogy is about tools, so it's very appropriate. If I like to target shoot with a gun for fun, then I should not be restricted from it by people killing other people with guns. Every gun shoots different, so the experience had is very different from gun to gun. You want to blame guns, but user reason and accept that guns aren't to blame for this, that there was other underlying issues and the person is to blame. If he had run up in the classroom with a hammer and killed his mother and one six year old, it's still not acceptable to me that it happened. And it shouldn't be OK with anyone if that was all that happened. And, to take it one step further, imagine if one of the adults in the room was allowed to be armed, then it still would have turned out very different and a gun could have saved the day. But no, only murderers own guns right? They are only meant to kill children and innocent people, correct?

How is the shooters mental problems an issue for the millions of people in this country that do not use their weapons to commit murder?

It's not. It's an issue for the government that allows them to freely circulate, knowing full well that someone can and will use them to kill at any time. Because apart from hunting (for which you don't need a sidearm or an assault rifle), they aren't good at anything but murder.

Your idea of restricting gun control will not stop criminals from owning guns and will not stop a psychopath from murdering as many people as they can before either killing themselves or getting stopped by somebody.

It might not stop killing as a whole, but it will sure as shit stop some of it. You see this happening over in Europe with the same frequency?

I said it before: a murdering psychopath is not an unstoppable force. When deprived of a good tool, he can only do so much. And not every former law-abiding citizen with a mental problem can just hop to your friendly neighborhood black market to get himself AK47s for free like every gun defender seems to imply. You're putting the best murder tools available in the hands of civilians. I understand it's cultural and it's hard to change. But that does not absolve it of the blame.

When I heard about the shooting, I was in the middle of a game of BF3 with some friends. We were barely winning, and any small change could have made us loose the match. I heard the news, and I powered down my controller, walked over to the XBox, and powered it down. My friends lost the match, called to ask what the hell, I told them the news, and now we've all resolved to not touch shooters until the new year.

RandomMan01:This is kinda sad. Come on guys, will not playing shooters for ONE day really be that hard? It's a single stinking day for pity's sake.

On the topic of what the media will say, who cares? They been blaming games since Columbine, and they're still going to no matter what we do. Why do we have to care? They have already tried and failed to get anti-game laws passed, and what makes you think that will be different now?

Yes, this is a pointless gesture. No, it will not change anything. But, it still is a show of respect for the people involved, and to top it off, it requires very little effort. So, just don't play shooters for a single day, do you really have nothing else to play or do?

Oh, and for all those people who actually want to play violent shooters, "out of spite", shame on you. I can understand it if you just don't care enough to participate (I don't like it, but I can understand), but if you want to play a game you wouldn't normally play, like Postal, just to spite the people who actually want to show respect, then you are just being selfish, petty, and obtuse.

Agreed. It's said that a simple request to voluntarily show respect is taken as to mean "OMGWTFTHEYRETAKINGMYSHOOTERSAWAY!!!!"

Grow up people. No one's taking your precious shooter games away nor are they going to ban you from playing it. (see bibblles half assed comment earlier as proof if you're going to say that no one's saying that) Is it a token gesture? Sure it is. But stop acting like this simple request is going to destroy games and gaming in large, because it isn't.

Baresark:That is ridiculous. The world would only be a better place if he wasn't mentally deranged. I don't know why people insist that if someone gets away with one murder it is so much better than someone getting away with 26 murders. It's just bad policy to let a psychopath determine rules for an entire society. I'm free not to own a gun and I do not feel threatened by people who own guns. It's not about gun control, it's about social and mental health.

Ok, What should we do to keep guns out of hands of psychopaths? Put a camera in everyone's house? or remove all guns? Or have some bloody Gun Control? Making guns illegal & Gun Control is not the same thing. Pick your blown mind of the floor please, I want to blow it again. The world would be better if he had a less deadly gun, a smaller magazine, fewer bullets. Yes, it would be better if he did not do it at all. But rule of life number 1: Shit Happens & there is nothing you can do about it, exept damage control. 9mms will not be taken, your AK-47 (which you don't need) will. Gun Control is about getting the Assult-rifles off the streets, to get the oversized magazins away. I know what you are gone say, the 2nd ammement, which says guns, not Assult-Rifles with 100 bullets magazins. Also, do you know how long it take to kill someone with a Gun? 1 second. With a knife you have to get to the victim & fight the victim. There is no way the effectiveness of a Knife can be equalled that of a gun.

How is the shooters mental problems an issue for the millions of people in this country that do not use their weapons to commit murder?

It's not. It's an issue for the government that allows them to freely circulate, knowing full well that someone can and will use them to kill at any time. Because apart from hunting (for which you don't need a sidearm or an assault rifle), they aren't good at anything but murder.

Your idea of restricting gun control will not stop criminals from owning guns and will not stop a psychopath from murdering as many people as they can before either killing themselves or getting stopped by somebody.

It might not stop killing as a whole, but it will sure as shit stop some of it. You see this happening over in Europe with the same frequency?

I said it before: a murdering psychopath is not an unstoppable force. When deprived of a good tool, he can only do so much. And not every former law-abiding citizen with a mental problem can just hop to your friendly neighborhood black market to get himself AK47s for free like every gun defender seems to imply. You're putting the best murder tools available in the hands of civilians. I understand it's cultural and it's hard to change. But that does not absolve it of the blame.

First: One article about a guy with a knife doesn't prove anything. Also, he clearly meant to maim and not kill. No one would sever a finger or an ear for any other reason. You have not provide proof at all of what you say.

Second: The government does not freely allow them to circulate. Getting a license to own any such gun is a process, even in the most liberal states. I'm not sure you are aware of this, but the psychopath in question did not even buy the gun, his own mother got it for him, which is perhaps the biggest tragedy of all. He could not have gotten that gun on his own. That aside, where does this weird idea that you can buy a gun on every street corner come from exactly? It's not so, we are not unregulated. "Cool down" periods exist, background checks, mental health screening, these things exist. Get educated before you attack something.

Third: No one is saying reduction or elimination of violent crimes or murder is bad. But there are instances where people who own guns use them to protect their own lives. Home invasions, rape, attempted murder, these things happen and innocent people have saved themselves in those situation.

What is that good for? We gamers shouldn't feel guilty whenever a psychopath decides to go on a shooting spree just because some people in the media say so.This "cease fire" will only reinforce the notion that video games in general and shooters in particular have anything to do with shooting sprees, and I won't have any part of it.

Well, that is a stupid idea, if I ever saw one.How does anybody that is affected really care about us not playing shooters for one day, and as others pointed out this can be read by people who hate games as some sort of confession.

Also I would say we would all live a bit better and it would probably reduce these horrible acts of violence, if we all just stop paying so much attention (I know it is hard and stuff, but seriously 24/7 coverage and all that crap going down with hunting down ones Facebook profile and friends on there, asking the why question a thousand times and focusing the worlds attention on that). What kind of message does that send to the mentally unstable and probably future-violent?If you do that kind of thing, everybody will pay attention to you.

I don't like this action whatsoever, but then again, this stuff is not understandable for anyone, so this is just people who try to cope with it. Still misguided though.

PS: I didn't plan on gaming on Saturday (we plan on seeing the hobbit and then getting smashed at a high school reunion thing - nobody said that that would be disrespectful) anyways, I will not mix in a shooting game for making a point, I will just ignore it, if I get in the mood for a shooter, I will pick one up, if not, then not.

PPS: Is that how we gamers are not these days, bowing down and saying sorry for stuff we know that we haven't anything to do with?

First: One article about a guy with a knife doesn't prove anything. Also, he clearly meant to maim and not kill. No one would sever a finger or an ear for any other reason. You have not provide proof at all of what you say.

I've provided my evidence, which is still plenty more than yours. There's also empirical evidence (the actual shooting) and common sense evidence (it's easier to kill with a gun than with a knife - if you want to dispute this, let's imagine a scenario in which I have a gun and you have a knife, see who wins 10 out of 10 times).You have done nothing but rejected all of it with such amazing arguments as "It'd be just as easy if he had a knife".

Are we done here, or do you want to keep backpedalling some more?

That aside, where does this weird idea that you can buy a gun on every street corner come from exactly? It's not so, we are not unregulated. Get educated before you attack something.

Maybe try to put some effort into what you're reading before you let the veiled insults loose, because it went right over your head.How does "his mother brought it for him" help your case in any way? My argument is against civilians getting guns.

Third: No one is saying reduction or elimination of violent crimes or murder is bad. But there are instances where people who own guns use them to protect their own lives.

Fine, I'll concede that point. But it's hardly a problem considering the rest of the world is getting along just fine without them.

I frankly will continue to play on that day as any other day. Frankly, this just makes me want to play even more. Blaming games, or guns won't change what happened, nor will it stop it from happening again. If you really want to honor the family, then start trying to bring about meaningful change in the mental health care system of the US. Push for meaningful reform of the US prison system that turns people into worse criminals instead of reforming them. Push for a meaningful reform to the drug policy of this nation, de-criminalize drug use and treat addiction as a mental health issue. These 3 steps would help stop not only these tragic mass shootings, but also the thousands of tragedies every year in the US when someone is murdered.

Baresark:That is ridiculous. The world would only be a better place if he wasn't mentally deranged. I don't know why people insist that if someone gets away with one murder it is so much better than someone getting away with 26 murders. It's just bad policy to let a psychopath determine rules for an entire society. I'm free not to own a gun and I do not feel threatened by people who own guns. It's not about gun control, it's about social and mental health.

Ok, What should we do to keep guns out of hands of psychopaths? Put a camera in everyone's house? or remove all guns? Or have some bloody Gun Control? Making guns illegal & Gun Control is not the same thing. Pick your blown mind of the floor please, I want to blow it again. The world would be better if he had a less deadly gun, a smaller magazine, fewer bullets. Yes, it would be better if he did not do it at all. But rule of life number 1: Shit Happens & there is nothing you can do about it, exept damage control. 9mms will not be taken, your AK-47 (which you don't need) will. Gun Control is about getting the Assult-rifles off the streets, to get the oversized magazins away. I know what you are gone say, the 2nd ammement, which says guns, not Assult-Rifles with 100 bullets magazins. Also, do you know how long it take to kill someone with a Gun? 1 second. With a knife you have to get to the victim & fight the victim. There is no way the effectiveness of a Knife can be equalled that of a gun.

Checks exist. This guy did not get the gun himself, his now dead mother actually got the gun for him. Mental health checks, background checks,all of these systems exist to prevent that, but not all systems are perfect or infallible. A 24 year old man can over power most women and pretty much all six year old, so that isn't an issue for a knife wielder. At no point did I say a gun is the same as a knife. My whole point is the idea of kindergarten politics is broken, but every liberal minded left leaning person thinks it's ok to dictate what other people can have or not have. For that matter, every conservative minded right leaning person does the same shit but with different ideas.

GoddyofAus:Chyeah, good luck with this. Since when have the majority of gamers been compassionate enough to take up any cause except playing Half Life 2 to try and get Valves attention. As others have stated, this is perfect bait for fuckwits like Fox News to latch onto.

For good reason, I would think. How is this NOT "a peace offering" and admission that violent entertainment was the problem? That guns at large, even ones with a polygon count, are to blame and the best thing we could do is apologize by refraining for a single day? Fuckwits like MSNBC, CBS, and ABC are blaming everyone and everything but the killer. It doesn't surprise me at all that gamers are being called to stop gaming simply because their games contain guns. But I'm sure you're going to assume I'm defending Fox, and you'll ignore all I've said since I must be an idiot.

Baresark:Checks exist. This guy did not get the gun himself, his now dead mother actually got the gun for him. Mental health checks, background checks,all of these systems exist to prevent that, but not all systems are perfect or infallible. A 24 year old man can over power most women and pretty much all six year old, so that isn't an issue for a knife wielder. At no point did I say a gun is the same as a knife. My whole point is the idea of kindergarten politics is broken, but every liberal minded left leaning person thinks it's ok to dictate what other people can have or not have. For that matter, every conservative minded right leaning person does the same shit but with different ideas.

The problem is that those are more linked to social issues more than anything. Poor people, drug and sex trade, things like that.

That's been debunked time and again.

To sound cliche, guns don't kill people, people kill people.

But they are made a whole lot easier by guns, which is where that specious statement starts to break down.

Seriously, when is the last time someone used a hammer to directly kill dozens of people? Or, since cars almost inevitably come up, when's the last time someone drove a car into a school or movie theater and used it to kill people? Hell, contrast it to the 22 stabbings at a school in China. Most were not seriously injured, none died.

Besides, why facilitate murderers? The logic of "they're just going to do it anyway" is ridiculous. shouldn't murder be harder? Should we make it easy for someone to kill 27 people?

Do we oppose seatbelts because people are going to die anyway? We even say "seatbelts save lives," even though steabelts don't save people, people save people.

Are we against food safety because some people will invariably get sick?

When a natural disaster happens, do we just shrug and say "what are you going to do?"

It's pretty damn hard to massacre with a hammer. Or a bowling ball. Or even a knife.

I have never seen social issues causing crime and murder debunked. People seem under the impression that if someone has a gun they are going to kill someone. That is simply untrue.

You can't dictate the rules for an entire society because psychopaths exist. Seat belts do save people, just not everyone. And occasionally cause someone to die. My issue is that all the gun control nuts out there say that the world would be better off if guns didn't exist. That is completely true, but they do exist. I'm not saying no gun rules. But he could have had the same "success" in his endeavor if he had a small snub nose pistol. So the type of gun is irrelevant. The ease of killing is not particularly relevant because if someone has the will to do it, then they will do it. No one is against gun safety, but you and I have very different idea of what that actually means. For me it's about education and experience. For the vast majority of people, this is enough. For some people it's about no one being allowed to have them, but criminals will have them, which is the impetus for people who aren't criminals to have them.

Given the amount of preparation he went through, it isn't unreasonable to say he could've taken the time to whip up homemade explosives and stuffed them in the car. Guns are by no means the most deadly, devastating, or easy-to-obtain weapons out there. The first WTC bombing cost the bomber less than the price of a Glock. A man in China committed a similar slaughter to Newtown, but he did it with a knife. Just as many casualties, with an even more hardcore police force simply not arriving on time. Should we ban knives? Knives were invented by our ancestors to hunt and to wage war, and then they tied them to sticks and called them spears. Surely we live in a society where knives are obsolete? I see cooking shows where scissors are used instead to cut meat, and Cuisinarts are used to dice vegetables. Of course not, but you see where this is going.

xDarc:You know what else bothers me about this whole thing; all this focus on stopping spree killers. It's emotional over-reaction. Spree killers account for what? Like 0.005% of annual firearms deaths in the US? Hell- I'll even take out all the suicides- 0.01%.

Everyone wants to know why the spree killer does it, but when 4 people were shot and killed last week in a home invasion/robbery here in Detroit, nobody gives a rat's ass.

Exactly my problem as well. Thousands die every fucking day from various causes but the moment some shooting happens in a school that just so happens to result in more deaths than normal?

OH THE HUMANITY! WE MUST TAKE DRASTIC MEASUREZZZ OMFG BAN ALL GUNS BURN THE NRA'S OFFICE MARCH IN THE STREETS OMMZZGZFFZZGZZGZZGZG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

For fuck's sake I honestly wonder why everyone is so stupid. Look at africa. Warlords literally kindnap shit tons of children from the homes, some force feed them a bunch of drugs, strap rifle on them, and throw them into a warzone. You don't hear any rallying cries and reaction to that do you? You just hear "meh" from these very same people going apeshit over a 28 death shooting which is as big a deal compared to the whole picture as the hair on my ass to being pulled off to the rest of the hair on my body. Fuck.